POLITICAL CORRECTNESSThe term “Native American”is preferred over “Indian” in
reverence to those who take umbrage with the word. Regarding the political correctness
of our choice of terminology, it is reflective of a poll (from the Smithsonian
Institution, Museum of American Indian) of American Tribes whereby “Eastern
Tribes” preferred to be called “ Native Americans” and “Western
Tribes” preferred to be called “Indians”. However, the term “Indians”,
as found in this project, will be maintained in the context as found in historical
documents.

GEOGRAPHY
Essex County, because of its resources and rich history, has been marketed
as the “Jewel of New England” and described as a microcosm
of Massachusetts. Within its 500 square miles, she has old cities, suburbs
and rural towns as well as 121miles of inlets and outlets along its coastline.
She is connected to the rest of the New England landscape by two east -west
interstate routes intersecting with two more taking us north south. From
the west to east, our drumlins shrink in elevation and melt into the coastal
plain, sandy on the east, rocky on the south. The lifeblood of our landscape
is provided by the waterflows through the Merrimack River Watershed in
the north, the Ipswich River Watershed in the center, and coastal streams
in the south. These ancient travel corridors feed the Great Salt Marsh
of Ipswich Bay and the Great Saugus Salt Marsh as they join the Massachusetts
Bay. Today, Essex County has grown to a population of almost three quarter
of a million inhabitants but has held her reputation for beauty. As late
as 1970, land use planners analyzing her development patterns, reported
that 50% of her acreage, after almost 350 years, was still in “forest”.

As one travels from
town to town in Essex
County, the natural attributes
and beautiful panoramic
views can’t be
missed. Away from the
built-up areas, there
are still wonderful surprises
in the countryside, along
the riversides and along
the coastline, in the
same locations as they
were 400 years ago, equally
appreciated by Native
American Indians. There
is still an excitement
when a deer is seen feeding,
when a group of wild
turkeys crosses one’s
path and when a fisherman
brings home his daily
catch. .

This project (hereinafter referred to, as the “Native
American Deeds”) will show that we are connected
to this ancient civilization not only by history but also
by the land. It facilitates a cultural awareness
and enhances access to a collection of historically significant
land records transacted four centuries ago. They are the
heart of this project. From them, readers will learn more
about the Native American Indians who lived in Essex County,
the location of their ancient Indian villages, and how
the Indians interacted with the English until
the land they “owned” was no longer their
land. It is an extraordinary story about those Native
Americans who long ago traveled over this landscape that
we call today “ our” front yard and backyard,
and along “our” rivers, and through “our” forests”.
Much of “our” land could be considered “hallowed
ground”.

The “Indian
Deeds” are the
path to discovering
the story of a friendly
people who once heavily
populated this area
and were displaced
by foreigners and their
diseases. They were,
for a number of overwhelming
reasons, forced to
sell their land and
in the process eventually
lose their lifestyle,
their dignity and their
identity. This book
connects us to the
beginning of private
land ownership in Essex
County, and to the
historical political
events that shaped,
and constantly reshaped,
the dynamic elements
associated with the
Native American Deeds.
This project, in a
unique way, connects
us today from any and
all points on Essex
County’s landscape,
to our Native American
heritage.

This is the first regional
history of the first
people who lived in Essex
County, but as a minimum
it offers a new perspective
to the Native American
Indian culture here,
with specific emphasis
on the 17th Century. It
is a historically significant
period in our history,
whereby one culture was
displaced by another.
The beginning of this
period is referred to
as the “ Point
of Contact”. In
1620, the Pilgrims of
Plymouth Colony started
the timeline of continuing
recorded history for
New England. Its course
was substantially redirected
eight years later by
the arrival of first
members of the Massachusetts
Bay Colony at Naumkeag
(Salem). The story has
been traditionally reported
as a history (favoring
the English point of
view) of the “colonization
of America”, which
is masked in political
and religious conquest.

TIMELINES AND "MEN
OF RANK"
It is impossible to separate the history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony See
Timelines Mass Bay Colony 1600-1700 from the significant political influence
on it by men who identify significantly with a place to be eventually called
Essex County. Timelines Essex County 1600-1700 They
were the “men of rank and considerable land revenues in Old England
(Endicott, Winthrops, Dudley, Bradstreet, Saltonstall, Symonds, Higgenson,
Downing, Dennison, Bellingham).

Equally important contributors
to our regional history
were our resident Native
American Indian “men
of rank and considerable
land revenues in New
England (in the persons
of Nanepashemet, Cushemakin,
Passaconaway, Wannalancit,
Sachems Passa Quo & Sagga
Hew, Masconomet, Black
Will, the Squaw Sachem,
Sagamore John, Sagamore
James, Sagamore George
No Nose, James “Rumneymarsh” a.k.a.
Quanopuwitt, and Old
Will). Historical accounts
of this period are traditionally
limited to King Philip’s
War, and reduced to an
unfortunate sprinkling
of Indian lore and legend.
The Native American Deeds
are real “evidence” of
this history and enhance
our understanding. The “Native
American Deeds” is
about property rights
to land. It is important
to keep in mind that
the 17th Century, in
this region, began
as a new Colony having
self-governing powers
under a 1629 Mass Bay
(Royal) Charter See Links,
which encouraged political
independence yet demanded
loyalty to the monarchy
and an economic tithing
of gold, silver and
furs, and later ship
timber. In this first
century of Colonial
New England, five English
monarchs and a mid-century
Crowellian “Long
Parliament” also
shaped its history,
all who holding differing
attitudes toward their
Colonial servant-cousins.
There were King’s
Grants, See Map of
Early Grants of large
tracts of land, with
authorization to subdivide
the same but without
a system for recording
property interests.
Researchers of this
subject soon discover
that there were many
overlapping land grants.
Those receiving grants
had in many cases a
certain timeframe,
e.g.: two or three
years to establish
a permanent colony
or lose their grant.
In certain cases the
grants were revoked
while other efforts
for permanent settlement
just failed to survive.

In the absence of actual
land Record Books, early
boundary surveys and
maps were used to illustrate,
in a general way, the
location of “possessions” and
land holdings. Complicating
the security of real
property interests for
the Colonists were land
dealings with the Native
Americans Indians. Some
transactions were recorded
in Town Record Books
others were not. It has
been reported that one
of the earliest Indian
land transfers in this
region occurred in 1629
between the Pennacook
Sagamore Passaconaway
and agents for Sir Ferdinando
Gorges for all the land
between the Piscataqua
River and the Merrimack
River. This conveyance
occurred prior to the
establishment of a colonial “County
Recorded Property System”.
The land in question
had been earlier granted
to Sir Ferdinando and
his business partner
Captain John Mason by
a 1622 King’s Patent.
Gorges (the most influential
Englishman whose primary
focus was on “land
development/colonization” in
New England) were now
negotiating with Passaconaway,
See Image the most influential
Native American in the
region. The Registry
does not have a copy
of this negotiation,
but it is a significant
event. See Links.

Gorges also engineered and arranged financing for the settlement voyages
of George Weymouth in 1605; for Captain John Smith in 1614, 1615 and 1616;
and he was able to legally and geographically separate the Plymouth Company
from the patents of the London Company for their voyage in 1620.

Later, Gorges also intervened
for a 1622 land grant
of “Fullerton Isles” (named
by Captain John Smith
in 1614, later referred
to as “Nahant” after
the Indian tribe residing
there) to his son Captain
Robert Gorges. Robert’s
title seems to have lapsed
and never was revived.
In 1630, local Indian
Sagamore named Poquanum,
aka “Black Will”,
conveyed the
same land. “Duke
William”, who is
renowned as the Indian
who “sold Nahant
to farmer Thomas Dexter
for a suit of clothes.” See
Image

Shortly thereafter
he again sold Nahant
to a farmer from Swampscott.
In the 1650’s,
a descendant chief called
Sagamore George No Nose,
claiming Nahant as Indian
land, mortgaged Nahant
for 20 pounds to Attorney
Charles Davidson, agent
for Matthew Craddock
of London, to finance
his legal fight to regain
his tribal lands. (He
is called that odd name
in the Native
American Deeds and
various depositions,
but its origination is
uncertain. The most plausible
explanation seems to
be that this dreadful
fate befell him in 1633
when his family was afflicted
with the small pox epidemic.
His two older brother
Sagamores died and his
face was deformed.) This
record called an “Indenture”,
meaning contract or debt,
was ironically filed
in Suffolk County in
Book No. 1. George No
Nose appeared before
many sessions of the
Mass. General Court,
until he was finally
told in 1657 not to petition
the Court again on this
matter. That year, the
Towne of Lynn, after
battling many claims
in addition to Sagamore
George, was determined
by the Court to hold
legal interest in Nahant.
However, about 20 years
later, the Towne of Lynn
also signed two quitclaim
deeds with the descendents
of Sagamore George No
Nose (to extinguish all
future land claims by
Indians) for the inhabitants
of Lynn, including areas
of Reading, Lynnfield,
Nahant, Saugus and Swampscott.

This “Native
American Deeds” story
(using original source
documents) chronicles
how land interests
and competing claims
for the same land eventually
caused bitter legal
battles, and incited
the first American
Indian wars. As early
as 1634, and again
in 1686, recorded events
occurred which would
set the stage for American
Independence. In 1634,
according to historian
Samuel A. Drake, one
of the voyages from
England carried with
it a copy of the commission
granted to two Archbishops
and ten of the Council
to regulate all plantations,
to call in all patents,
to make laws, to raise
tithes and portions
for ministers, to remove
and punish governors,
and to hear and determine
all causes and inflict
all punishments. This
plenary power was leveled
at the Colonists and
they were told that
soldiers were preparing
to ship from England
to bring over a royal
governor and implement
this much dreaded commission.
Needless to say this
aroused the spirit
of resistance and stood
the Colony on the threshold
of open rebellion.
A solemn consultation
with magistrates and
ministers resulted
in the determination
to defend them if there
was any prospect of
success. This was the
first expression of
independence by the
colonies. This position
would be restated in
1684, 50 years later,
when King Charles II
revoked the 1629 Massachusetts
Bay Colony Charter.
The Colonists offered
these Native American
Deeds of Essex County
(and other towns) in
evidence, as proof
that the land had been
purchased and now was
owned by them. They
further argued that
the Charter authorized
self-government but
was silent on the subject
of private property.

The “Native
American Deeds” also
summarizes the beginning
of Colonial occupation
and land use as determined
by its Charter containing
broad powers of self-government.
It marks the beginning
of a democracy on the
soil of Essex County.
In 1628 a sub-patent
from the Plymouth Council,
land was granted to
certain persons extending
from 3miles north of
the Merrimack River
to 3 miles south of
the Charles River.
The Massachusetts Bay
Colony boundaries were
much more expansive
than Plymouth Colony.
Guided by this written
Charter (a patent to
the hands of John Winthrop,
John Humphrey, Mathew
Craddock, Isaac Johnson,
Thomas Goff, Sir Richard
Saltonstall, John Endicott,
Simon Whitcomb, all
original patentees)
they formed the new
Company of Massachusetts
Bay in New England.
Authority was granted
by the Charter to have
officers including
a Governor, Deputy
Governor and eighteen
assistants to be chosen
by the freeman at a
General Court. Of these,
Mathew Craddock was
selected Governor,
but he chose to stay
at home to handle financial
matters of the association.
The General Court was
to meet four times
a year to select officers,
and to enact laws and
ordinances. Such sessions
were to be held upon
every 1st Wednesday
of Hilliary, Easter,
Trinity and Michaelmas.
It was the General
Court, which controlled
land grants and promulgated
rules for dealing with
the Indians.

SETTLEMENTS
John Endicott, acting Governor, led the first band of pioneers to Salem in
1628 and he was guided by a letter to deal with the natives that claim
ownership of the land, so as not to give any impression of impropriety.
In 1630, John Winthrop brought a group over and was selected to succeed
Endicott as Governor. He found Salem unacceptable as a place to live and
under the terms of the Charter relocated the seat of government south to
Charlestown, “Shawmut” as called by the Indians, and later
called Boston.

When they arrived in
1630, the English colonists,
led by Governor John
Winthrop, felt that there
was sufficient legal
right to the land under
the royal charter. He,
while aware of the company’s
directive to deal with
the natives claiming
ownership in the land,
considered them inferior
and lazy and not capable
of “improving” the
vast landscape in the
Colony. Land not “improved” (cleared
and fenced) was regarded
as vacant “virgin” land,
waiting to be taken.
In short order, he created
a “Divine Mandate” in
the minds of the Puritan
gentry (the Assistants)
and used the clergy to
justify any legislation
related to Colonial interaction
with the Native Americans.
The Indians who were
the first residents and
who inhabited this land
for several thousand
years had a different
sense of ownership of
the land. According to
Edward Winslow, the Indians,
although without any
written deeds or plot
plans, devised a property
rights system whereby
the geographic limits
of tribal territory and
hunting lands were abundantly
clear. They used physical
landmarks such as hills
and rivers as territorial
boundaries, which were “fluid” depending
on tribal and kinship
alliances. The English,
on the other hand, used
fences and stonewalls
to mark their lands and
lot lines. In addition,
the English wrote a legal
description in a public
book describing the buyers
and sellers of land and
the location and size
of the property. The
Native American concept
of real property rights
centered on the tribal
ownership and the “authorized
individual use” of
the land for survival.
The English understanding
of real property rights,
to the contrary, was
that land was a commodity
to be privately owned,
bought and sold for a
profit, or deeded by
estate. It is debatable
whether religious and
political freedom surpassed
the possibility of land
ownership as the prime
incentive to immigrate
to America. What is reported,
as English greed would
suggest that cheap or
free land was the big
attraction?

RECORDING PROPERTY
RIGHTS
The Colony started to grow and “new towns” were established by
the authority of the Mass. General Court and recorded on the record by the
Clerk. As thousands of more “adventurers” arrived, petitions
were made to the Mass. Bay General Court (of Assistants) by groups of immigrants
for land grants (typically six miles square) to settle in “parishes” and
to” improve” the land within a specified period of time. Once
the grant was authorized, the parish leaders could then subdivide the “district” or
the “town” to individual lots from “common land.” By
1639, it is estimated there were 30,000 immigrants in New England. See Chart
These rights of ownership had to be recorded by law within six months (for
tax purposes) in a “Town Book, under a penalty of a fine or what was
called in Boston, in 1634, the “Book of Possessions”. In 1636,
the Quarterly Courts were formed. They would meet in towns like Salem, Ipswich,
and Hampton and were convened by the “Magistrates”, later called “Commissioners”,
who would act as land recorders. This project will focus on negotiated land
deals between the Native Americans and the English colonists, which were
recorded in the Court’s Books of Deeds by the Clerk of Courts. While
the concept of “counties “ was geographically and politically
familiar to the colonial mind, up to 1643 no division had yet been made.
In May of that year, the Colony formed its first Shires, or Counties, each
being required to raise a militia and to hold Quarterly Court. However, it
wasn’t until 1692 that there was an official administrative position
established for a Register of Deeds.

There are two distinct categories of recorded Native American Deeds.
Upon reading these Deeds, one can see a time gap between the “first
generation of Indian Deeds” (those negotiated before 1650) and the “second
generation of Indian Deeds (those negotiated between 1650 and 1701)”.
See Chart The latter were “quitclaim deeds”, but in reality were
actually “legal confirmations” of earlier arrangements. It has
now become clear how these two categories of deeds differ in content and
how they were “used” by the English Colonists. First generation
Deeds appear to be consensual and roughly bounded for convenience of accommodating
larger settlements. Second generation Deeds appear to have been created for
legal and defensive purposes. In fact, the latter in 1686, were collectively
place “in evidence” before the King’s Court, as proof of
ownership, outside the reach of the revoked Mass Bay Colony Charter.

A review of the early
traditional (English)
historical accounts indicates
that they were obviously
very self- serving. Some
critics labeled these
biased accounts as face-saving
for the Puritan gentry.
By offering such a description
of contemporary events,
it attracted more “adventurers “ from
Europe. It also resulted
in many misconceptions
(by omission) regarding
some of the most important
people of this period,
the first Native Americans
they encountered. These
people, inhabiting places
called Naumkeag, Agawam,
Saugus, Nahant, Annisquam,
Chebacco, Enon, Wessacucon,
Pentucket and Cochickiewick
were basically a friendly
people by all accounts.
Yet, it appears in many
instances, for their
convenience, the English
circulated descriptions
of Indians that they
encountered as “savages” or
as having “barbaric” behavior.
This mind-bending effort
helped to justify the
conquest of what was
promoted as an uncivilized “virgin” land.
The inconsistencies associated
with this posture will
be carefully examined.
This position of Governor
John Winthrop and the
General Court of Assistants
was even emblazoned on
the Seal of the Massachusetts
Bay Colony, which depicts
a Native American Indian
holding a banner over
his head, which reads “ Come
Over And Help Us”.

The generic savagery and demon hostility is not documented or specifically
attributed to any Native Americans from “our” region, however
by not distinguishing hostile from non-hostile Indians, it is evident they
all were “painted with the same brush”. It was also notably “convenient” to
engage the services of the “ savages” 1) to protect
the English from wolves, 2) to help them sidestep starvation during the
first cold winters, 3) to act as guides in unknown rivers and territories,
4) to serve as military scout against other Native Americans, and 5) to
be used as domestic servant and sold as a commodity. More importantly,
it was the same Native people who were the key to establishing for the
English a new trading economy, of furs. The English were not trappers but
traded European goods such as clothing, blankets, guns, knives and liquor
with the Natives for the highly profitable furs. Throughout this project
many issues that have not been clear regarding our local history are addressed,
as well as the legacy of the Native Americans who were encountered in the
areas of Salem and its stepsister Boston, during the 17th Century. The “Native
American Deeds” considers the points of cultural conflict, in addition
to the Colonial military triumphs, and will help increase the understanding
of why the Native American culture was “doomed” shortly after
the Point of Contact and permanent settlement. The Native Indians were,
by design, “physically separated from their eco-system and their
way of life”.

HISTORIC ACCOUNTS
Examples of the first category include works by: John Winthrop, Ipswich's
Rev. William Hubbard, and Increase & Rev. Cotton Mather. Members
of the second category include works by: French explorer Samuel de Champlain,
Captain John Smith, William Wood, Roger William, the "unprincipled adventurer" Thomas
Morton (whose merciless ridicules must be filtered), and finally Daniel
Gookin (Mass Bay Colony's Supt. Of Indian Affairs). An out of period
account, the 19th century work of Samuel Adams Drake can be aligned with
the credibility of the second category. The style of the latter
group is distinguished by the fact that they wrote for the benefit of their
fellow countrymen, without bias or without taking "defensive" positions
(as taken by the Puritans whose agenda was to conquer the land). They
also chose kinder and non-offensive terminology calling the Natives either "Indian" or "Aberginians" (this
is Wood's term for Pennacooks, Passaconaways, and other tribes in northern
Mass. and southern N.H.), not "Savages". Their physical
descriptions of the people and their lifestyles have been accepted as more
credible than the Puritan descriptions.

Since Sydney
Perley's effort, this
subject has been visited
from many new perspectives
shaped by other disciplines
including anthropology,
archeology and ecology. We
found some of those 20th
Century "contemporary" views
represented in the works
of Frank Speck, Charles
Willoughby, Warren Moorehead,
Ripley Bullen, Sherbourn
F. Cook, Alden Vaughan,
Gordon Day, William Cronon,
Frances Jennings, and
Peter Leavenworth. These
references are particularly
valuable when contemplating
the broader issues associated
with the inter-cultural
conflict attached to
the transfer of land
between the Native American
Indians and the Colonists. Such
points of view have been
integrated into this
project to better prepare
readers for a fuller
consideration of the
meaning and content of
the "Native AmericanDeeds" themselves. All
published references
used in this narrative
are listed in the back
of each section.